It's so easy to gloss Jesus as standing for an anaemic, proto-libertarian 'tolerance', that this is why he associated with prostitutes etc, but the ppl who've internalised it need it to be the case because they have no protocol for judgement as a form of love https://twitter.com/Faustinablavat1/status/1357372476192415744

The liberal appropriation of this idea reflects the total intolerance towards transgression Jesus intended to critique- in their reading, he can only associate with prostitutes if they're 'good', so prostitution 'must be good'

The implication of this is that Jesus wouldn't associate with anything 'bad'- liberal tolerance relies on a hidden structure of punitive moralism, since if 'everything' is ostensibly 'fine' (incl. prostitution, drugs etc), the few prohibitions left must be literally unspeakable

Within the liberal frame, one is either 'tolerant' or 'intolerant' of sex work- hating the sin while loving the sinner is an impossibility, as what a person does is taken as the expression of their 'true will'- sin and sinner are identified permanently

As an aside, ppl critiquing social justice like to analogise sin with 'whiteness' in SJ rhetoric but I'd argue that the latter is the product of viewing action as identified with essence- white ppl 'can't help acting white'

You can see the psychological toll this frame takes on ppl btw- the fear and anxiety surrounding transgression permeates liberalism (one can see it inflect MeToo amongst other things) because ppl operate on a binary of permitted/ unspeakable